ÌÈÒÍÀ ÑÏÐÀÂÀ ¹5(83)’2012, ÷àñòèíà 2, êíèãà 2 70 ñ àíãëèéñêîãî / Ïîä ðåä.: Íèêèôîðîâ Á.Ñ. (Ïðåäèñë.); Ïåð.: Íèêèôîðîâ À.Ñ. - Ì.: Ïðîãðåññ, 1969. - 303 c. 9. Óãîëîâíûé êîäåêñ Ôðàíöèè. Ïðèíÿò â 1992 ã. Âñòóïèë â ñèëó ñ 1 ìàðòà 1994 ã. Ñ èçìåíåíèÿìè è äîïîëíåíèÿìè íà 1 ÿíâàðÿ 2002 ã.: Ïåðåâîä ñ ôðàíöóçñêîãî / Íàó÷. ðåä.: Ãîëîâêî Ë.Â., Êðûëîâà Í.Å. (Ïåð., ïðåäèñë.) - Ñ.-Ïá.: Þðèä. öåíòð Ïðåññ, 2002. - 650 c. 10. Óãîëîâíûé êîäåêñ Èñïàíèè / [ïîä ðåäàêöèåé è ñ ïðåäèñëîâèåì äîêòîðà þð. íàóê, ïðîôåññîðà Í.Ô. Êóçíåöîâîé è äîêòîðà þðèä. íàóê, ïðîôåññîðà Ô.Ì. Ðåøåòíèêîâà]. – Ì. : Èçäàòåëüñòâî ÇÅÐÖÀËÎ, 1998. – 218 ñ. 11. Óãîëîâíûé êîäåêñ Èíäèè. Ïåðåâîä ñ àíãëèéñêîãî / Ïîä ðåä.: Íèêèôîðîâ Á.Ñ. (Ïðåäèñë.); Ïåð.: Ìèõëèí À.Ñ. - Ì.: Èíîñòð. ëèò., 1958. - 240 c. 12. Óãîëîâíûé êîäåêñ Àðãåíòèíû. Îïóáëèêîâàí 29 îêòÿáðÿ 1921 ãîäà. Âñòóïèë â ñèëó 29 àïðåëÿ 1922 / Âñòóï. ñò.: Ãîëèê Þ.À. - Ñ.-Ïá.: Þðèä. öåíòð Ïðåññ, 2003. - 240 c. 13. Óãîëîâíûé êîäåêñ Ðîññèéñêîé Ôåäåðàöèè îò 13.06.1996 ã. ¹ 63-ÔÇ : ïðèíÿò ÃÄ ÔÑ ÐÔ 24.05.1996 ã. (ðåä. îò 28.04.2009 ã.) // Ðîññèéñêàÿ ãàçåòà. – 1996. – ¹ 113; 114; 115; 118. 14. Codul penal al României [Êðèì³íàëüíèé êîäåêñ Ðóìóí³¿]; http://www.dsclex.ro/ coduri/cod_penal_2006.htm. ÓÄÊ 343.13 ².Â. Ãëîâþê, ê.þ.í., äîöåíò êàôåäðè êðèì³íàëüíîãî ïðîöåñó ÍÓ «ÎÞÀ» ÎÇÍÀÊÈ ÊÐÈ̲ÍÀËÜÍÎ-ÏÐÎÖÅÑÓÀËÜÍÈÕ ÔÓÍÊÖ²É Ñòàòòÿ ïðèñâÿ÷åíà äîñë³äæåííþ ïèòàíü îçíàê êðèì³íàëüíî-ïðîöåñóàëüíèõ ôóíêö³é. Ïðîàíàë³çîâàíî äîêòðèíàëüí³ ï³äõîäè ùîäî ñèñòåìàòèçàö³¿ îçíàê êðèì³íàëüíî-ïðîöåñóàëüíèõ ôóíêö³é. Çðîáëåíî âèñíîâîê, ùî îçíàêàìè êðèì³íàëüíî-ïðîöåñóàëüíèõ ôóíêö³é º: ¿¿ ä³ÿëüí³ñíèé õàðàêòåð; ö³ëåñïðÿìîâàíèé õàðàêòåð; ãåíåðóþ÷èé õàðàêòåð; íåâ³ää³ëüí³ñòü â³ä ¿¿ íîñ³ÿ – ñóá’ºêòà êðèì³íàëüíîãî ïðîöåñó; ìîæëèâ³ñòü çä³éñíåííÿ ñóá’ºêòîì äåê³ëüêîõ êðèì³íàëüíî-ïðîöåñóàëüíèõ ôóíêö³é; ìîæëèâ³ñòü çä³éñíåííÿ îäí³º¿ ôóíêö³¿ äåê³ëüêîìà ñóá’ºêòàìè; íàä³ëåííÿ ñóá’ºêòà ïðîöåñóàëüíîþ êîìïåòåíö³ºþ àáî ïðîöåñóàëüíèì ñòàòóñîì äëÿ ðåàë³çàö³¿ ôóíêö³¿; ïðàâîâèé õàðàêòåð; íàÿâí³ñòü ïðîöåñóàëüíèõ çàñîá³â ¿¿ ðåàë³çàö³¿. Êëþ÷îâ³ ñëîâà: êðèì³íàëüíå ïðîâàäæåííÿ, êðèì³íàëüíî-ïðîöåñóàëüíà ôóíêö³ÿ, ñóá’ºêò, ³íòåðåñ, ïðàâà òà îáîâ’ÿçêè, çàâäàííÿ. Ñòàòüÿ ïîñâÿùåíà èññëåäîâàíèþ âîïðîñîâ ïðèçíàêîâ óãîëîâíî-ïðîöåññóàëüíûõ ôóíêöèé. Ïðîàíà- ëèçèðîâàíû äîêòðèíàëüíûå ïîäõîäû ïî ñèñòåìàòèçàöèè ïðèçíàêîâ óãîëîâíî-ïðîöåññóàëüíûõ ôóíêöèé. Ñäåëàí âûâîä, ÷òî ïðèçíàêàìè óãîëîâíî-ïðîöåññóàëüíûõ ôóíêöèé ÿâëÿþòñÿ ñëåäóþùèå: åå äåÿòåëüíîñòíûé õàðàêòåð; öåëåíàïðàâëåííûé õàðàêòåð; ãåíåðèðóþùèé õàðàêòåð; íåîòäåëèìîñòü îò åå íîñèòåëÿ – ñóáúåêòà óãîëîâíîãî ïðîöåññà; âîçìîæíîñòü îñóùåñòâëåíèÿ ñóáúåêòîì íåñêîëüêèõ óãîëîâíî-ïðîöåññóàëüíûõ ôóíêöèé; âîçìîæíîñòü îñóùåñòâëåíèÿ îäíîé ôóíêöèè íåñêîëüêèìè ñóáúåêòàìè; íàäåëåíèå ñóáúåêòà ïðîöåññóàëüíîé êîìïåòåíöèåé èëè ïðîöåññóàëüíûì ñòàòóñîì äëÿ ðåàëèçàöèè ôóíêöèè; ïðàâîâîé õàðàêòåð; íàëè÷èå ïðîöåññóàëüíûé ñðåäñòâ åå ðåàëèçàöèè. Êëþ÷åâûå ñëîâà: óãîëîâíîå ïðîèçâîäñòâî, óãîëîâíî-ïðîöåññóàëüíàÿ ôóíêöèÿ, ñóáúåêò, èíòåðåñ, ïðàâà è îáÿçàííîñòè, çàäà÷è. This article covers the study of particulars of criminal procedure functions features. Doctrinal approach for systematization of criminal procedures functions have been analyzed. Have come to the conclusion of following criminal procedural functions features: it’s activity nature; purposeful nature; generating nature; inseparability from its bearer - entity of criminal procedure; possibility of realization of several criminal-procedure functions by the entity; possibility of realization of one function by several entities; investment of entity by procedural competency or procedural state for realization of the functions; legal nature; presence of procedural means of its realization. Key words: criminal proceeding, criminal procedure functions, entity, interests, rights and duties, tasks.